I have an issue to bring up. It's just an observation.
I want to make the disclaimer that I am not expert in astronomy or astrology. My observation comes from my own critical thinking and opinions.
I am fascinated by the debates between tropicalists and siderealists. My personal opinion is that the tropical zodiac is more accurate, at least when describing me and my immediate relatives.
Personal point out of the way, I think there is one glaring omission (or at least largely overlooked) in this debate, as far as I have seen :
In following sidereal astrology logic, it is assumed that the fact that the sun seems to be in this or the other sign from our point of view, must somehow mean that the influence of that sign is actually being somehow channeled into earth by the sun. I think this is a flaw. It's very lineal thinking, in my view. The universe, human consciousness, and its connection, I would like to think, has more dimensions to it, it's not only lineal.
I hold a sort of mystical view that everything has some degree of consciousness and is ever-developing. In the case of planets and stars (actual sidereal constellations), they would be the physical manifestation of very powerful and evolved consciousnesses traditionally called Logoi. The latter sending their powerful emissions in every direction according to their own nature.
What's to say that the cyclical outpouring of this, or the other sign's influence, wherever the influence comes from, has nothing to do with alignment (from our point of view) of the sun against the backdrop of the stars from our point of view... like the Siderealists assume? What if there is a less obvious mechanism going on, that acts independently of the wobble in the earth's axis? If that theory is correct, then we would be dealing with Intelligent forces, surely, they would not depend on our "point of view" in order to work and interact with each other. This is my personal view. Doesn't mean I am right, or wrong. I am still refining my view on this..
I realize some people do not believe in actual energetic influence, but rather see the alignment of the sun and constellations as synchronistic markers of sorts, with zero actual influence from the planets and constellations to us. In that case, a better argument could be made against my stance, but to me that is not a completely logical point, since there must be some sort of "energy" keeping the synchronicity, there must be a source for the phenomena, an energetic one. There must be "something" holding the clock together in perfect rhythm and synchronicity. I find that sort of materialistic thinking kind of contradictory with the general concept of Astrology itself.
I subscribe to the axiom "As above, so below" I totally think it is feasible that just like humans interact with their different personalities, agendas, etc, then so it is at a higher, incomprehensible level in the heavens. Why can't the influence of the constellations be channeled by our "local ruler" (the SUN), filtered, somewhat, before being distributed to us via the traditional tropical Earth-Sun relationship, instead of lineally coming down to us according to our precession-dependent point of view like the Siderealists (intuitively, but in my view simplistically) believe? The view I hold is not new. What I hope to bring to the discussion is the questioning of the assumption that visually seeing the Sun in front of a constellation = we are under the influence of that constellation.
In my view, the Sun (in the traditional tropical way) would be the entity that would put those powerful sidereal forces in context for earth. It is like a marriage between the tropical and sidereal views.
Just for consideration...
Please do not take this as an attack. I am not the owner of the absolute truth and try to update myself every day. I just hope my specific observation can spark another angle of this old debate.
I want to make the disclaimer that I am not expert in astronomy or astrology. My observation comes from my own critical thinking and opinions.
I am fascinated by the debates between tropicalists and siderealists. My personal opinion is that the tropical zodiac is more accurate, at least when describing me and my immediate relatives.
Personal point out of the way, I think there is one glaring omission (or at least largely overlooked) in this debate, as far as I have seen :
In following sidereal astrology logic, it is assumed that the fact that the sun seems to be in this or the other sign from our point of view, must somehow mean that the influence of that sign is actually being somehow channeled into earth by the sun. I think this is a flaw. It's very lineal thinking, in my view. The universe, human consciousness, and its connection, I would like to think, has more dimensions to it, it's not only lineal.
I hold a sort of mystical view that everything has some degree of consciousness and is ever-developing. In the case of planets and stars (actual sidereal constellations), they would be the physical manifestation of very powerful and evolved consciousnesses traditionally called Logoi. The latter sending their powerful emissions in every direction according to their own nature.
What's to say that the cyclical outpouring of this, or the other sign's influence, wherever the influence comes from, has nothing to do with alignment (from our point of view) of the sun against the backdrop of the stars from our point of view... like the Siderealists assume? What if there is a less obvious mechanism going on, that acts independently of the wobble in the earth's axis? If that theory is correct, then we would be dealing with Intelligent forces, surely, they would not depend on our "point of view" in order to work and interact with each other. This is my personal view. Doesn't mean I am right, or wrong. I am still refining my view on this..
I realize some people do not believe in actual energetic influence, but rather see the alignment of the sun and constellations as synchronistic markers of sorts, with zero actual influence from the planets and constellations to us. In that case, a better argument could be made against my stance, but to me that is not a completely logical point, since there must be some sort of "energy" keeping the synchronicity, there must be a source for the phenomena, an energetic one. There must be "something" holding the clock together in perfect rhythm and synchronicity. I find that sort of materialistic thinking kind of contradictory with the general concept of Astrology itself.
I subscribe to the axiom "As above, so below" I totally think it is feasible that just like humans interact with their different personalities, agendas, etc, then so it is at a higher, incomprehensible level in the heavens. Why can't the influence of the constellations be channeled by our "local ruler" (the SUN), filtered, somewhat, before being distributed to us via the traditional tropical Earth-Sun relationship, instead of lineally coming down to us according to our precession-dependent point of view like the Siderealists (intuitively, but in my view simplistically) believe? The view I hold is not new. What I hope to bring to the discussion is the questioning of the assumption that visually seeing the Sun in front of a constellation = we are under the influence of that constellation.
In my view, the Sun (in the traditional tropical way) would be the entity that would put those powerful sidereal forces in context for earth. It is like a marriage between the tropical and sidereal views.
Just for consideration...
Please do not take this as an attack. I am not the owner of the absolute truth and try to update myself every day. I just hope my specific observation can spark another angle of this old debate.
Last edited: